It appears Clinton not only doesn't know what "wipe a server" means, she can't even operate a calendar.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***

Quote

And this one is a federal crime

CBS is reporting a released email where HC instructs and aid to remove the classified marking on some info!!!

Common sense would dictate it is only illegal if the information was actually classified.

But of course you are correct

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article53685825.html

I never said the email did not contain classified information. I am pretty sure I am not the arbiter on whether information is classified or not. I am also sure you are not.

[turtlespeed 226]

SkyDekker

******

Quote

And this one is a federal crime

CBS is reporting a released email where HC instructs and aid to remove the classified marking on some info!!!

Common sense would dictate it is only illegal if the information was actually classified.

But of course you are correct

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article53685825.html

I never said the email did not contain classified information. I am pretty sure I am not the arbiter on whether information is classified or not. I am also sure you are not.

So you defend her because . . . You are confident she didn't commit the crime, or that she is on your team and you must protect your team mates?

What on earth are you going to do when the rest comes out, after any presidential election that is, and she is shown to have done these things?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billeisele 130]

bottom line - anyone else that did this would have already been arrested and charged with a federal crime

she is a crook, liar, criminal and probably directly involved in what most people would call murder

if you can support that then have at it

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[winsor 236]

One thing I find marvelously ironic is that Hillary makes Dick Nixon seem like a pillar of virtue by comparison - quite an accomplishment in and of itself. All things being said, the sonofabitch was possessed of more honesty and integrity than she has ever shown.

It speaks badly that we should put forth such evil people to be commanders in chief.

Every time I have thought "we can't do worse than this," someone comes along and proves me wrong. Hillary is but a case in point.

When she first came to the White House and ordered the staff to dress in mufti since she found military uniforms "offensive" (a position from which she rapidly backtracked), she alienated me forever. Off the record anecdotes from acquaintances who worked in her immediate vicinity have painted a uniform picture of an entirely odious person.

If she ever behaved in a manner that was not reprehensible, it would give me pause. That has yet to happen.

It is said that a people get the government they deserve. Given the roster of malevolent cretins from which we may choose, it can only be concluded that we suck out loud.

I will vote this time around, but will likely need some Dramamine or whatever to quell the nausea while doing so.


BSBD,

Winsor

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

So you defend her because

Uhmmm, I didn't defend her. I simply stated that without that bit of information we don't know if what she did was illegal.

[turtlespeed 226]

SkyDekker

Quote

So you defend her because

Uhmmm, I didn't defend her. I simply stated that without that bit of information we don't know if what she did was illegal.

Uhmmmm, I'm pretty sure we do, but the AG won't do anything about it at the moment.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Uhmmmm, I'm pretty sure we do,

So, was the information actually classified? Do you have a source for this?

[turtlespeed 226]

SkyDekker

Quote

Uhmmmm, I'm pretty sure we do,

So, was the information actually classified? Do you have a source for this?

Some of the material in the emails is always classified, as in, always has been and will be.

All you have to do is read this without the optics of your bias.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 868]

"While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it."

Right there in the second paragraph.

So, no proof.

[turtlespeed 226]

normiss

"While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it."

Right there in the second paragraph.

So, no proof.

Did you stop there?

Paragraphs 3 and 4:

Quote

But the details included in those "Classified" stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.

The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Rstanley0312 1]

normiss

"While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it."

Right there in the second paragraph.

So, no proof.

Classified info or intel is not stamped like in cartoons. Sometimes it has certain markings which several of the emails now released have. Much of the time there is not a marking and it does not need one. There is certain information that makes something classified and she should know that. She also signed a document saying she understood all of these rules. As the Sec. of State she most certainly knows she broke the rules. The whole "it wasn't mark classified" line is for people that do not understand how it all works which sadly is most of the population. As stated by someone else earlier, a lower level person would be fired and doing time for far less.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[normiss 868]

I've noted that in the past as well.
"Classified" is rather generic at best.

[Rstanley0312 1]

normiss

I've noted that in the past as well.
"Classified" is rather generic at best.

Word.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[JerryBaumchen 1,451]

Hi turtle,

Quote

appear to undermine this account

Quote

indicate that some of Clinton's emails

Would you consider someone guilty on those non-factual comments?

We have a judicial system; she is guilty of nothing until convicted.

You can vote for whomever you wish; my money says she will be the next POTUS.

Jerry Baumchen

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Classified info or intel is not stamped like in cartoons. Sometimes it has certain markings which several of the emails now released have. Much of the time there is not a marking and it does not need one.

Fully understood.

My understanding of this latest issue is that she instructed an underling to remove the classification marking and people here were screaming how that was evidence of all kinds of stuff. To which I replied that obviously it wasn't evidence of anything unless the material in question was actually classified.

In the grander scheme she was stupid for setting up a personal email server, no doubt.

[normiss 868]

Well, a previous president had it set up in her home, so was it really her fault?
I just don't see any intent to do harm of any kind.
During the 90's, email was not quite a critical function of business, it was close, but it was still more convenience than business critical, much less thought of as a security risk.
Most of the email servers I supported then (including some in top secret environments) lacked any true security protections.
Including a few in DC for that matter.

[turtlespeed 226]

JerryBaumchen

Hi turtle,

Quote

appear to undermine this account

***indicate that some of Clinton's emails

Would you consider someone guilty on those non-factual comments?

We have a judicial system; she is guilty of nothing until convicted.

You can vote for whomever you wish; my money says she will be the next POTUS.

Jerry Baumchen

That would be terrible for the country.

How do you get a conviction when the prosecution folds before there is any case made?
If the AG won't charge her, what difference, at this point, does it really make anyway?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 868]

It's hard to indict someone with no factual evidence as proof of anything.
Is this what you would consider a standard bar for guilt or innocence?

[wmw999 2,558]

I see the email server as a failure of staff judgment. No way she'd know personally, but by 1998 we already had a government-mandated secure side to our work network. Joe Subway wouldn't have mattered, but as SOS she should have had fairly regular audits and/or reviews. If done with a critical eye, rather than a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" one, this should have turned up.

It's a big point to me. Not a deal-breaker, as I'd vote for her in a NY minute over someone like Ted Cruz or (most likely) the Donald. But she's weaving around the arguments like some of our SC posters here .

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[RonD1120 62]

turtlespeed

That would be terrible for the country.

How do you get a conviction when the prosecution folds before there is any case made?
If the AG won't charge her, what difference, at this point, does it really make anyway?

An interesting comment I heard today, "The top two candidates for the Democratic nomination are one that should be in prison and the other should be in a nursing home."

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Coreeece 2]

RonD1120

***That would be terrible for the country.

How do you get a conviction when the prosecution folds before there is any case made?
If the AG won't charge her, what difference, at this point, does it really make anyway?

An interesting comment I heard today, "The top two candidates for the Democratic nomination are one that should be in prison and the other should be in a nursing home."

I would actually be proud of the democrats if they nominated Bernie "anybody but Hillary" Sanders.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[RonD1120 62]

Coreeece

******That would be terrible for the country.

How do you get a conviction when the prosecution folds before there is any case made?
If the AG won't charge her, what difference, at this point, does it really make anyway?

An interesting comment I heard today, "The top two candidates for the Democratic nomination are one that should be in prison and the other should be in a nursing home."

I would actually be proud of the democrats if they nominated Bernie "anybody but Hillary" Sanders.

Now that I think about it, I agree with you.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.